Section » Litigation
Incorporation by reference does not expand claim scope
In those heady days of yesteryear, when the patent filing fee was $35 and prior art was printed on crumbling paper, patent attorneys relished the word “means.” They drank coffee from a “cup means,” wrote letters with a “pen means,” and played golf with “club means.” Somehow the word “means” seemed to convert mundane coffee cups,
More Articles
TiVo Inc. v. Echostar Corp.
En banc Federal Circuit Modifies Standard on Findings of Contempt Regarding Permanent Injunctions; $90 million sanctions ruling against EchoStar survives over dissent. TiVo Inc. v. Echostar Corp., No. 2009-1374 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 20, 2010). The en banc Federal Circuit clarifies the “more than colorable
THE ORAL ARGUMENT IN MYRIAD, April 4th, 2011
On Monday, April 4, 2011 a long line of lawyers and interested parties waited to enter the Federal Circuit to hear the much anticipated oral arguments in The Association of American Pathology v. Myriad. Amongst them were HDP patent attorneys, who filed an Amicus Brief in the Appeal. BACKGROUND: The
IS THE END IN SIGHT FOR PATENT MISMARKING CLAIMS?
In In re BP Lubricants USA Inc., [Misc. 960](March 15, 2011) the Federal Circuit granted BP Lubricant’s Petition for a writ of mandamus directing the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois to dismiss a complaint for false patent marking under 35 USC §292 filed against BP.
Perfecting Security Interests in Intellectual Property Is Not a Perfect Process
By Robert J. Lenihan, II and Allen E. Pittoors In 1962, Michigan slightly revised, and then adopted, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). The UCC governs commercial transactions. Article 9 of the UCC generally relates to secured transactions and governs the perfection of security interests in personal
Improper Revival of Patent That Expired for Non-Payment of Maintenance Fees Is Not a Defense to Patent Infringement, But It Could Be Inequitable Conduct
Improper revival of a patent that expired for non-payment of maintenance fees can be raised as inequitable conduct, but not as grounds for invalidity. In Abstrax, Inc. v. Dell, Inc., No. 2:07-CV-221-DF-CE (E.D. Tex. Oct.
Litigation Avoidance Strategy No. 1: Better Patent Claims = Less Litigation
It is often a miscalculation to assume that a company’s patent attorneys can, on their own, develop patent specifications and claims that will withstand the rigors of litigation and/or prevent a competitor from getting into its business space. Too often, patent attorneys cannot understand your business